DIRS.INFO The most relevant business & tech news

WASHINGTON — Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh said the Supreme Court is not as divided as members of the public might think, praising his liberal colleagues and highlighting rulings in which the justices were not divided on ideological lines during a recent public appearance. Kavanaugh had special praise for the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the recently retired liberal Justice Stephen Breyer and Breyer’s successor, liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, saying she “has hit the ground running" and is "thoroughly prepared." Ginsburg and Breyer "couldn't have been better at welcoming me to the court," Kavanaugh said, referring to his nomination by then-President Donald Trump in 2018. Kavanaugh this week appeared eager to counter any perceptions that the court is usually divided on ideological lines, pointing out several cases in which he had joined liberal justices in 5-4 decisions. Statistics compiled for the SCOTUSblog legal website showed, however, that in the previous court term only 29 percent of the decisions were unanimous, lower than at any time in the past two decades.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday belatedly issued the first ruling of its nine-month term that started in October, more than a month behind its normal schedule. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the court's first opinion, with the justices ruling unanimously against Navy veteran Adolfo Arellano in a technical dispute over disability benefits. The court dismissed a second case concerning the scope of attorney-client privilege without issuing a written ruling. With the court term running from October to June, the first opinions are usually released in November or December. Adam Feldman, who tracks Supreme Court statistics, found that this term is the first since 1917 that the court had not released a ruling by the beginning of December.

☆ Protesting against Congress may get you a $50 fine. Disrupting the Supreme Court is a different story.
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-22 | by ( Https | Media-Cldnry.S-Nbcnews.Com Image Upload Newscms Lawrencehurley_Pic.Jpg | Lawrence Hurley | ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +3 min

WASHINGTON — When Emily Paterson was arrested for protesting abortion law changes during a Supreme Court hearing in November, she spent the night in jail and now has a criminal conviction on her record. It’s a sore point for Mark Goldstone, a lawyer who regularly represents Washington protesters. Supreme Court protesters are treated “more harshly” in a couple of different ways, he said, referring only to those participating in nonviolent protests and not violent attacks like the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol. On Capitol grounds, the police “process you and release you,” Goldstone said, while at the Supreme Court, “you are going to spend the night in jail" and likely face prosecution. Participants have long complained that the right to protest outside the court is limited, pointing out the irony of the Supreme Court imposing its own limits on the right to free speech.

WASHINGTON — Supreme Court justices spoke with the official in charge of the investigation into the leak of an unpublished draft of an opinion in a consequential abortion case, a court official confirmed Friday. Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley, who led the probe, said in a statement that she "spoke with each of the justices, several on multiple occasions." The justices "actively cooperated," Curley said, and after following up on all leads she concluded that neither the justices nor any spouses were implicated. "On this basis I did not believe that it was necessary to ask the justices to sign sworn affidavits," Curley added. The lack of signed affidavits suggests that the justices were not formally interviewed in the same way as court staff.

The justices will weigh a claim brought by Geraldine Tyler, a 93-year-old whose property in Minnesota was seized by Hennepin County because she owed $15,000 in property taxes and related costs. The state says that under Minnesota law it “provides ample opportunity for property owners to protect their interests” before a property is seized. The state’s lawyers point out that owners have three years to pay the taxes and have an opportunity to repurchase the seized property. The case was brought by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative legal group that often brings property rights cases. The Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, is often sympathetic to property rights claims.

☆ Supreme Court takes up convicted stalker’s plea to decide what constitutes a 'true threat'
▼ + stars: | 2023-01-13 | by ( Https | Media-Cldnry.S-Nbcnews.Com Image Upload Newscms Lawrencehurley_Pic.Jpg | Lawrence Hurley | ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +2 min

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide what kind of conduct constitutes a “true threat” that can be prosecuted as a criminal offense in a case brought by a Colorado man who repeatedly sent abusive messages to a local musician. If such messages are not true threats, they are deemed protected speech under the Constitution's First Amendment. Counterman's lawyers are asking the court to limit the definition of a true threat to situations in which the defendant intended to threaten the person. In Counterman’s case, prosecutors focused on messages he sent to Whalen on Facebook for two years starting in 2014. The conviction was upheld on appeal, prompting him to ask the Supreme Court to intervene.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear an evangelical Christian mail carrier's employment discrimination claim in a case that could force employers to do more to accommodate the religious practices of their workers. Postal Service could have granted his request that he be spared Sunday shifts based on his religious belief that it is a day of worship and rest. Based on his request for an accommodation, his managers arranged for other postal workers to deliver packages on Sundays until July 2018. Upon resigning, he sued the Postal Service for failing to accommodate his request. In the earlier ruling, the court said that employers are not required to make accommodation if it would impose even a minimal burden.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday hears a dispute between the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and a concrete company in Washington state that labor advocates say could weaken workers’ rights if the ruling goes against the union. The legal question is whether the company, Glacier Northwest Inc., can sue the union for damages in state court over an August 2017 strike action in which it says that concrete was lost when drivers walked off the job. Business interests that are often in conflict with organized labor have in the past been heavily critical of the labor board. The Supreme Court's conservative majority has ruled against unions in several high-profile cases in recent years. As a result of the strike, concrete hardened in the trucks and had to be broken up before it could be removed, the company says.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday revived a Texas death row inmate’s claim that his murder conviction should be tossed out on the grounds that DNA evidence used at trial was later found to be unreliable. In a rare move, prosecutors had agreed that the evidence was faulty and there should be a new trial. The Supreme Court sent the case back to an appeals court in Texas "for further consideration in light of the confession of error by Texas," the brief order said. Prosecutors accepted that finding and notified the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which was reviewing the case. At the Supreme Court, Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza, representing the state, urged the justices to rule in Escobar’s favor.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday allowed Meta to pursue a lawsuit alleging that an Israeli company unlawfully accessed WhatsApp servers when installing spyware on users’ devices. The lawsuit, filed in October 2019, alleges that NSO violated various laws, including the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, when it installed the “Pegasus” spyware. Meta claims that NSO unlawfully accessed WhatsApp servers earlier in 2019, enabling it to conduct surveillance of 1,400 people, including journalists and human rights activists. “Some WhatsApp users are violent criminals and terrorists who exploit the software’s encryption to avoid detection,” the company’s lawyers wrote. In fact, she noted, no foreign government has told the State Department that NSO was acting on its behalf.

Both would be setbacks for the Biden administration. In another immigration-related case, the court has yet to rule on the Biden administration’s attempt to implement its immigration enforcement priorities. For Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, the administration’s top advocate at the court, arguing before such a conservative court is a constant uphill battle. The government similarly failed to convince the conservative majority not to expand gun rights in another major ruling issued that month. The Biden administration can point to some hard-fought victories.

☆ Supreme Court keeps in place Trump-era immigration policy allowing asylum-seekers to be quickly turned away
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-27 | by ( Https | Media-Cldnry.S-Nbcnews.Com Image Upload Newscms Lawrencehurley_Pic.Jpg | Lawrence Hurley | ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +5 min

The court voted 5-4 to grant an emergency request by 19 Republican state attorneys general who sought to intervene in defense of the policy. The brief court order said that while the administration cannot set aside the Title 42 policy, the decision "does not prevent the federal government from taking any action with respect to that policy." Gavin Newsom, has warned that the system for handling migrants seeking asylum would “break” if Title 42 is ended. Chief Justice John Roberts on Dec. 19 placed a temporary hold on Sullivan’s ruling while the Supreme Court weighed its next steps. Title 42, named after a section of U.S. law, gives the federal government power to take emergency action to keep diseases out of the country.

WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John Roberts on Monday placed a temporary hold on a lower court ruling that would end a Trump-era immigration policy implemented during the pandemic to allow asylum-seekers to be quickly turned away at the border. The brief order came after Republican-led states asked the Supreme Court to keep the policy in place. Roberts ordered that the federal district court ruling, which was due to go into effect on Wednesday, be put on hold until the Supreme Court acts. He asked the Biden administration and groups challenging the policy to file a response to the states' request by Tuesday afternoon. The appeals court said in its order last week that the states had waited too long before attempting to intervene.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a second bid to revive President Joe Biden's student loan forgiveness plan, which will be heard in February alongside a case the justices have already agreed to hear. In both the cases, lower courts blocked the plan, meaning the Supreme Court will have the final say on whether it ever goes into effect. The case the court said Monday that it would take up involves two holders of student loan debt, Myra Brown and Alexander Taylor, who claimed the administration had failed to follow the correct procedure in announcing the plan. A federal judge in Texas invalided it nationwide, prompting the administration to turn to the Supreme Court. In the other case, the court on Dec. 1 said it would hear an administration appeal involving a challenge brought by six states.

The appeals court had given Trump until Thursday to appeal to the full 11th Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court and try to get a stay before the order took effect. After the FBI executed its Mar-a-Lago search warrant, a top Trump adviser familiar with his legal strategy told NBC News that the former president would probably “appeal everything to the Supreme Court. It also barred the special master from reviewing those documents, a decision that Trump appealed to the Supreme Court in October and lost. Under federal law, official White House papers are federal property and must be handed over to the National Archives when a president leaves office. The most recent defeat came last month, when the court allowed Trump's tax returns to be disclosed to a Democratic-led House committee.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear a major case that could upend election law as the justices consider whether to reinstate Republican-drawn congressional districts in North Carolina. The case, which could have a broad impact on an array of election issues, is being closely watched for its potential impact on the 2024 presidential election. Republicans led by Tim Moore, the Republican speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, invoked the theory after the state Supreme Court in February struck down the congressional district map. Activists protest partisan gerrymandering at the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. on Mar. Moore and other Republicans immediately asked the Supreme Court to reinstate the maps, saying the state court had overstepped its authority.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday hears the latest clash between religious conservatives and LGBTQ rights as it weighs a conservative evangelical Christian web designer's bid to avoid working on same-sex weddings. Lower courts ruled against Smith, prompting her to appeal to the Supreme Court. The remaining 21 states do not have laws explicitly protecting LGBTQ rights in public accommodations, although some local municipalities do. The court ruled on the baker case before the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who voted in favor of LGBTQ rights in key cases. In another major victory for LGBTQ rights, the Supreme Court in 2020 — to the surprise of many court-watchers — ruled that a federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in employment protects LGBTQ employees.

Lower courts ruled against Smith, prompting her to appeal to the Supreme Court. The remaining 21 states do not have laws explicitly protecting LGBTQ rights in public accommodations, although some local municipalities do. Alliance Defending Freedom, which also represented Phillips, has had success arguing religious rights cases at the Supreme Court in recent years. The court ruled on the baker case before the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, who voted in favor of LGBTQ rights in key cases. In another major victory for LGBTQ rights, the Supreme Court in 2020, to the surprise of many court-watchers, ruled that a federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in employment protects LGBTQ employees.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday delayed a decision on whether to grant President Joe Biden's bid to implement his student loan forgiveness plan, announcing instead that it will hear full oral arguments on an expedited basis. In a brief order, the court said it would hear arguments in February with a decision soon to follow. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday refused to lift that hold, meaning that the administration could soon appeal that case to the Supreme Court too. A federal judge had ruled that the states did not have legal standing to pursue the lawsuit, but the appeals court disagreed, focusing on a Missouri agency that services federal student loans. The overall program is anticipated to help more than 40 million borrowers, the administration has said.

☆ Dispute over North Carolina congressional districts tees up major elections case at Supreme Court
▼ + stars: | 2022-12-01 | by ( Https | Media-Cldnry.S-Nbcnews.Com Image Upload Newscms Lawrencehurley_Pic.Jpg | Lawrence Hurley | ) www.nbcnews.com time to read: +9 min

WASHINGTON — When the North Carolina Supreme Court struck down the Republican-drawn congressional district maps in February, Rep. Tim Moore, the Republican speaker of the state’s House of Representatives, reached for some potent ammunition. Moore said in an interview that he backed the theory because it is the only way to challenge a state court ruling that he believes was not based on law or precedent. Republicans, led by Moore, immediately asked the Supreme Court to reinstate the maps. Gary D. Robertson / AP fileThe independent state legislature theory claims state legislatures have the final say over election laws, potentially shielding their actions from state courts. He also said he believed that the governor had the power to veto elections legislation, a procedure cast into doubt by at least one interpretation of the independent state legislature theory.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday will consider the Biden administration's effort to revive a policy that set immigration enforcement priorities by focusing on public safety threats. The administration is seeking to overturn a Texas-based federal judge's ruling in June that blocked the policy nationwide. Biden administration lawyers argue that the president has broad discretion to set enforcement priorities. A third question concerns whether the judge had the authority to block the policy even if it is unlawful. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 in July to reject the Biden administration's request to immediately restore the policy but agreed to hear oral arguments.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday questioned whether an ex-aide to former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo was lawfully convicted on a bribery charge as it considered narrowing the scope of a federal law aimed at curbing public corruption. Percoco says that because he was not working for the government at the time, he had no duty to provide honest services. The court on Monday is also hearing a second case arising from the same New York corruption investigation. Several others targeted in the investigation, including Aiello, have their own appeals pending at the Supreme Court.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected former President Donald Trump's last-ditch plea to block the release of his tax records to House Democrats, paving the way for their possible disclosure to the lawmakers. Earlier this month, Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily blocked the Ways and Means panel from accessing Trump’s tax records while the court decided how to act on Trump’s request. House Democrats, as well as the Biden administration, urged the court to reject Trump's request, saying their demand for the tax documents reflected a valid legislative purpose. Democrats have been calling for Trump to release his tax returns ever since the 2016 presidential campaign. While no law requires presidential candidates to release their tax returns, it has become the norm for both Democrats and Republicans to do so.

Conservative Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito on Saturday strenuously denied any involvement in leaking the outcome of a 2014 ruling in a lengthy statement issued in response to a New York Times report. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority that strongly favors religious rights and frequently rules in favor of conservative Christian interests. Gayle Wright told the Times she did not obtain or pass along any information to Schenck, who has since become a supporter of abortion rights. Chief Justice John Roberts announced in May that he had launched an investigation of the leak but there has been no update since. Meanwhile, liberal members of the court have suggested that the court risks undermining its legitimacy by abruptly unraveling decades of precedent.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday declined to block the release of Arizona Republican Party Chair Kelli Ward’s phone records to the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. The justices rejected an emergency request filed by Ward, meaning that phone records associated with her T-Mobile cellphone will be disclosed to the House committee. The committee is pursuing only Kelli Ward’s records. At the Supreme Court, Ward argued that the subpoena violates her right to freedom of association under the Constitution’s First Amendment. Those actions have come under scrutiny by the Justice Department as well as the Jan. 6 committee.

Search resuls for: "Media-Cldnry.S-Nbcnews.Com Image Upload Newscms Lawrencehurley_Pic.Jpg"

25 mentions found